You are here

Reports and Studies

Below is a list of a number of past published studies conducted by the Research Division. Some Center reports are not published or made publicly available due to restrictions in place from the source of the research request. Most research reports can be downloaded and in some instances, a hardcopy publication can be requested.

Displaying 21 - 30 of 299
Will return exact match for word(s) entered
Title Datesort ascending
ADR in the Federal District Courts: An Initial Report

This report provides a brief history of alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, in the federal district courts, touching on the statutes that have prompted ADR developments and noting policy guidance and support to assist courts in establishing ADR programs. The report then provides a summary of ADR procedures authorized in the district courts as of late 2011.

November 16, 2011
Update on Resolution of Rule 12(b)(6) Motions Granted with Leave to Amend: Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules

In our March 2011 report, we indicated that following the Supreme Court decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim were granted more frequently with leave to amend the complaint. We also noted that the opportunity to amend the complaint may cure the defect and change the findings of the study. The Advisory Committee asked that we follow the events in the study cases, determine the extent to which the respondents submitted amended complaints, and report the outcome of any subsequent motions to dismiss.

November 1, 2011
The Timing of Scheduling Orders and Discovery Cut-Off Dates

The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules asked the Federal Judicial Center to study the operation of Rules 16 and 26(f) in the district courts. This report summarizes findings of part of that study. Specifically, this report examines the timing of Rule 16 scheduling orders in civil cases and, drawing from those scheduling orders, also examines the timing of the first discovery cut-off date imposed, without regard to any extension. The data analyzed in this report were drawn from court records in 11 districts.

October 1, 2011
Report Pursuant to Section 202(e) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010

The economic turmoil that affected the global economy and markets beginning in late 2007 is well documented. This report does not seek to restate those events or evaluate the potential causes of the resulting recession. Rather, this report is forward-looking and considers the existing statutory schemes for resolving any future distress at bank holding companies and nonbank financial institutions. Specifically, it analyzes Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”; a list of capitalized defined terms used herein is set forth at Appendix A) and Title II of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Act”). The Administrative Office of the United States Courts (“AOUSC”) submits this report pursuant to section 202(e) of the Act. This report to Congress was prepared with the assistance of the Federal Judicial Center.

July 21, 2011
Motions for Sanctions Based Upon Spoliation of Evidence in Civil Cases: Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules

In 2010, the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules requested a study of motions for sanctions based on an allegation that the nonmoving party had destroyed evidence, especially electronically stored information (ESI). The study examined the electronic docket records of civil cases filed in 2007–2008 in 19 districts, including at least one district in every circuit except the District of Columbia Circuit. This report summarizes the findings of that study and, where appropriate, compares those findings to other studies.

June 6, 2011
Comparative Study of the Taxation of Costs in the Circuit Courts of Appeals Under Rule 39 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure: Report to the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States

The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules requested this report on circuit practices for awarding costs under Rule 39 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The report describes the variations among the circuits' rules and procedures, compares how the circuits have implemented Fed. R. App. P 39, and presents a comparative analysis of costs awards. It also offers some procedural and conclusory observations from the research.

April 1, 2011
Surveys of Bankruptcy Court Practices Regarding Applications for Administrative Costs

The reports below detail the results of two surveys, conducted in 2010–2011, of bankruptcy attorneys and bankruptcy clerks of court about court practices regarding applications for payment of administrative expenses. Appendix A provides examples of existing court procedures for requests of such payments.

March 17, 2011
Motions to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim After Iqbal: Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules

This report presents the findings of a Federal Judicial Center study on the filing and resolution of motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The study was requested by the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules. This request was prompted by two recent Supreme Court decisions Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)  that interpreted Rule 8(a) by stating that a plaintiff must present a "plausible" claim for relief.

March 1, 2011
A Summary of Responses to a National Survey of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Disclosure Practices in Criminal Cases: Final Report to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules - Appendices

The Center prepared this report at the request of the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules as it considers whether to amend Rule 16 to incorporate the government's constitutional obligation to provide exculpatory and impeachment evidence to the defense or, instead, to create a broader disclosure obligation. The Center conducted a national survey, which included an online survey of all federal district and magistrate judges, U.S. Attorneys' Offices, federal defenders, and a sample of defense attorneys in criminal cases that terminated during calendar year 2009.

 

February 1, 2011
A Summary of Responses to a National Survey of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Disclosure Practices in Criminal Cases: Final Report to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules

The Center prepared this report at the request of the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules as it considers whether to amend Rule 16 to incorporate the government's constitutional obligation to provide exculpatory and impeachment evidence to the defense or, instead, to create a broader disclosure obligation. The Center conducted a national survey, which included an online survey of all federal district and magistrate judges, U.S. Attorneys' Offices, federal defenders, and a sample of defense attorneys in criminal cases that terminated during calendar year 2009.

February 1, 2011

Pages